Can Liberal democracy ever work in Africa?
By Kormi Nobert Goodsman
Liberal democracy, also known as ‘representative democracy’ or ‘Western democracy’ is a democratic system in which individual rights and freedoms are officially recognized and protected, and the exercise of political power is limited by the rule of law.
Clearly, the objective of liberal democracy is not limitless freedom. It is a political system that allows for a greater participation of the masses in the democratic process. It is also a system that makes rule of law paramount in the state. This is achieved through emboldening democratic institutions of state – many of which protects the rights of the individual and uphold liberal democratic principles; example, holding free and fair elections on the basis of universal adult suffrage.
Meanwhile, just as it happened in Europe in the 17th and the 18th centuries, Africa is still grappling with the concept of liberal democracy. Some scholars have even argued that the system is alien to their culture.
Even in Europe, during the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century, when the wind of change was blowing to welcome liberal democracy, many had considered the move as a threat to the very fundamentals of the society. The power to rule was then held by either the monarch or the autocrat and questioning it was tantamount to blasphemy since the power to rule was believed to be sacred and divine. Then gradually they gave in. Africa is also passing through the same times.
However, over the years, the fundamental problem for us on the continent has been the unmitigated debauchery of the democratization process. For example after the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, more than 100,000 people were put on trial. But it was discovered that, to use Western jurisprudence to trial all the accused persons will take about a century. So Rwanda wisely chose the traditional court system for the trials, but guess what? The government tried and debauched the process to achieve its own political agenda. We have seen several similar situations where governments take over systems that are running efficiently and independently and twist them to suit their political interests.
DO DEMOCRATIC STATES ACTUALLY PERFORM BETTER THAN NON-DEMOCRATIC STATES?
There is no doubt about the fact that authoritarian governments can also perform better. Arguably, China and a couple of African countries like Ethiopia and Rwanda which have one man at the top for quite a long time and exercise considerable power have made enviable strides in economic development.
In reality, certain authoritarian governments can deliver whiles others cannot simply break the mould over them. The same applies to the democratic states. Some of them can grow and others cannot. Therefore, growth, is not a preserve for one political system.
But over the years, the United States has shown that democratic states stand a good chance of achieving optimum growth especially here in Africa compared to authoritarian states. It showed that the more democratic a state becomes, the more it grows. Indeed some recent analysis and surveys have shown that, countries that hold periodic elections turn to be competitive, provide better services to their people, invest in areas like education, agriculture, science and technology than those who do not.
Despite the praise-songs we sing for countries like Rwanda and the rest, we must also note that, for every Rwanda, there is a DR Congo; for every Ethiopia, there is a Chad or Cameroon. These two countries ( Rwanda and Ethiopia) are the only places among the lot on the continent where ‘authoritarian’ regimes seem to be working. It is important to note that the bedrock picture of an average authoritarian regime is not those states. There are states that are failing terribly.
There is something rather cyclical here: every 20 years or so, people get very excited about certain authoritarian leaders who seem to be doing well at developing their countries. It might have been President Mugabe or Museveni in the past, but now they are said to be the most vicious authoritarian leaders who don’t want to relinquish power. In time, we may see the Rwandan government toe the line of the two above where its reputation will be cracked to undermine all the good works it has done.
The problem with the quasi-authoritarian regimes we have had here is that, the gains they make are not institutionalized with checks and balances, therefore, it is very easy for the leaders to use their systems to undermine the good works they have done over the years.
THE COTE D’IVOIRE EXAMPLE…
In a similar event, Ivory Coast was used to be called ‘the economic miracle’ in the late 1990s, but they had Houphet Boigny who was in power for almost 30 years. He adamantly refused to democratize the governance system, due to that, the country blew up in a civil war in 2005. His successor, Laurent Gbagbo came to power and also refused to open up the political system. The country blew up again in 2010 in another civil war.
If you look closely, there is a certain pattern and history that the destruction of African countries often begin with adamant refusal to open up the political system. That is why democracy is important.
Therefore, even though liberal democracy may not always be the catalyst for development, history, especially in Africa has taught us that authoritarianism is not ideal for this side.
PROBLEMATIC ELECTIONS
Another terrible constraint to the democratic process has been the problematic processes that mar the conduct of our elections. Some of the statistics on election rigging for example are just staggering. For example, we have about 60% of our elections which feature significant vote buying. About 30% features significant intimidation of opposition parties or sheer violence. Under those circumstances, it is difficult to conduct a free and fair election.
Those events are certainly not because of bad colonial policies, but are done by political leaders to entrench themselves in power.
IS AFRICA’S COLONIAL PAST THE PROBLEM?
Conspicuously, Africa has a problematic past. Many of the countries cited here, example, Kenya, Rwanda and the rest had terrible colonial experiences which polarized their countries mostly on ethnic lines and deprived them of their economic independence. This is clearly as a result of someone’s poisonous legacy for contemporary politics. Practices like the winner-takes-all and some other democratic practices have deeply divided the people instead of uniting them.
That said, our leaders have also aggravated the problems. Most decisions made by the leaders were not influenced by any colonial policy. It is their own initiatives to make themselves supermen. Therefore this is simply not because of certain colonial policies that have continued to bind us, but it is our own leaders who have continued to make bad policies for us the people.
It is also true that most colonial policies were atrocious, and in most cases discriminated against black Africans; but that not withstanding, after independence, many of our post colonial leaders have pursued the wrong economic policies. Most of them touted themselves as Socialists but the type of Socialism they practiced was the ‘Swiss-Bank Socialism’. Nothing more than to siphon money out to other countries and hide it there.
Also, politically, their policies were tailored towards one-party state and life presidency, often banning opposition groups. That has led to the ruin of many African countries.
THE WAY FORWARD
We have to focus on the young generation. There will surely be a change. The change will come from the fact that the youth population will find their place and be more active in the political process. That will be a significant stride.
We must also encourage more inclusiveness of women in our body politics. There has to be more women participation in the system which does not look good among us currently.
Evidently, despite Kenya’s currently difficulties, it has chalked great success over the years. Kenya is much stronger a country both economically and politically than some 25 years ago. If you were in Kenya in the late 80s and 90s, you would attest to widespread violence, oppression, low economic growth. However, things have improved considerably today. There was a new constitution in 2010 which provided for an independent supreme court which ruled against the sitting President in the historical election petition subsequently.
Therefore there is a clear indication that Africa will soon get onto the track of liberal democracy. We cannot continue to blame colonial powers for our failures. Leadership ought to take responsibility for their actions.
Africa Global News Publication
